The spectacle of the empty chair (and the gavel that no one wanted to receive)
It seems that international diplomacy has had an episode of Succession sneak in, but with a worse script and a much larger budget. The G20 summit in South Africa came to an end, and oh, surprise, the guest of honor – or rather, the next host – was conspicuous by his absence. Yes, the United States, the nation that will supposedly lead the bloc next year, decided it had better things to do than attend the meeting of the most powerful economies on the planet. The official excuse? That South Africa, the host country, is a terribly dangerous place… but only for a very specific and minority part of its population, according to the singular geopolitical criteria of Donald Trump. Because nothing says “serious foreign policy” like basing your boycotts on statements that seem like they came from an Internet forum at 3 in the morning.
The climax of this diplomatic drama was, without a doubt, the closing ceremony. South African President Cyril Ramaphosa banged a wooden gavel with the solemnity of a judge in a G20 tradition. A deck that, in theory, was to be given to the next host leader. But the US seat was emptier than the promises of a campaigning politician. The White House, in a last-minute burst of magnanimity, suggested that perhaps an official at its embassy—some lucky intern, I imagine—could pick up the symbolic hammer. South Africa, with a dignity that deserves a standing ovation, responded with “don’t even think about it.” So the deck was left without an owner, like a cake at a party that no one went to.
The statement that no one expected (especially the US)
While the elephant—or rather, the eagle—was not in the room, the other 19 members of the Group of 20 decided that the show must go on. And boy did they do it. In a move that broke with tradition, they issued a leadership statement on the first day, almost as if they wanted to make sure that if the US changed its mind, it would be too late to mess it up. The agenda, focused on climate change and global wealth inequality, was basically the reading list that the Trump administration refused to open. China, Russia, France, Germany and others supported the text, which called for financial aid for poor countries in the face of climate disasters. Come on, all the things that seem to matter when you’re not obsessed with who’s chasing who in a country thousands of miles away.
Argentina, loyal to its new ideological ally Trump, also opposed the declaration. Its president, Javier Milei, didn’t bother to show up either, probably too busy freeing up markets in his imagination. But the rest of the nations, in a rare moment of agreement, endorsed a document that put the priorities of Africa and the Global South at the center. Ramaphosa, with the satisfaction of someone who has managed to organize a family dinner to which his more troublesome cousin has not come, declared: “South Africa has used this presidency to place the priorities of Africa and the Global South firmly at the heart of the G20 agenda.” Then, in an open-mic moment that wasn’t supposed to be broadcast, he was heard whispering, “It wasn’t easy.” No, Cyril, I can’t imagine it.
And does this serve any purpose? The million dollar question
South Africa defended its declaration as a victory for international cooperation, a nice gesture against the “America First” policy. But let’s face it: G20 statements are like New Year’s resolutions; Everyone agrees that they are wonderful, but no one is really obligated to live up to them. They are not binding. And although the text included many of South Africa’s priorities, some concrete proposals, such as a new international panel on wealth inequality The G20 was formed in 1999 to respond to financial crises, but today some wonder if it is good for more than awkward group photos. The 122-point declaration barely mentioned Ukraine, even though leaders of all European nations and Russia sat in the same room. French President Emmanuel Macron summed it up with Gallic elegance: the bloc was “struggling to have a common standard in geopolitical crises.” Come on, it’s like trying to agree with cats in a swimming pool. Still, for the poorest countries, the summit had undeniable symbolic value. “This is the first meeting of world leaders in history where the emergence of inequality was put at the center of the agenda,” said Max Lawson of Oxfam. Namibian President Netumbo Nandi-Ndaitwah added that the importance of addressing development priorities from an African perspective “cannot be underestimated.” Of course, because when the owner of the largest house in the neighborhood doesn’t come to the neighborhood meeting, at least the others can decide where to put the recycling bins without his “supervision.” Meanwhile, Trump has already announced that the US will host next year’s summit at his golf club in Doral, Florida. Because nothing encourages global diplomacy like discussing the future of the world between holes, with a soft drink and an umbrella in between. Shall we bet the wooden mallet will turn into a golf club? Did you like this scathing analysis of global geopolitics? Share this article on your social networks and help more people discover the absurd side of international summits. And be sure to explore more related content to keep laughing (or crying) at the decisions that shape our world.
